Hi Ben
As always you deserve the most respectful response possible.
Thank you
Actually not surprised. I have read or looked at a few books and was kind of surprised to say the least of his language. I will add that his contemporary Catholic responses were almost as “vivid”. Reminds me of some 19th century U.S. political campaigns and their rhetoric. Makes ours seem mild today. People were indeed more “flowery” with words back then. I have also read that one of Ignatius’s (Jesuits) goals in countering the reformation was to “clean up” the uncouth or unsavory clergy. Even popes did stuff we would be surprised at today. I grew up with "Robin Hood) and I think it was a Friar Tuck who was quite earthy (well, at least ate a lot and drank a lot, of beer) .
I think that is what I mean by context of Luther’s language. Of course he will take responsibility for his every word but I dare say he was a product of his times. Something later, even modern, historians might forget and judge him more harshly. Forgive my uncouthness but dah . What did you expect, when state/seculars dictated the way to Christ ? The counter reformation in Germany was also political, aimed at winning over not just the parishioners, but the princes, who really held the key, to go this was or that way, for Luther or against. This was Luther’s context/dilemma. Does not Edward’s address this ? I think he does with, " And their intended purpose was to rally Protestants to the defense of their faith,"
In fact, Edwards, a prominent Lutheran Scholar, is extremely honest about Luther’s character:
“By his own admission, Luther was an angry man. Anger was his special sin. But **anger could be necessary and proper – and useful. It helped him, he said, to write well, to pray, and to preach. ‘Anger refreshes all my blood, sharpens my mind, and drives away temptations,’ **he once commented.
A reading of Luther’s polemical corpus does leave the impression, however, that
in his later years his anger became more shrill, and less leavened by compassion, humor, or even theological reflection. Moreover,
his always pungent language became more coarse and scatological. **The targets of his ire became under his pen the vilest of hypocrites, totally wicked, and insincere, willing minions of the devil, deserving the most horrible fate.” ** Edwards, ‘Companion’, pg. 204
As we know, it was more than two years prior to his excommunication that Luther first described the Pope as the antichrist, and as Edwards notes, his hateful language only got worse as his ‘career’ as a Christian Reformer progressed.
Ben, do you know of another Christian Theologian, in all of the history of Christianity, of whom the above quote could be so true that even a member of a communion which bears his name would have to admit it?
In other words, if there has been a more hateful Christian Theologian in the last 2000 years, who might that have been?
Edwards continues on referring to Luther’s last few years of publications:
“**On the heels of these treatises he published a series of scatological and violent woodcuts that, in the most graphic terms, suggested how good Christians should treat the papacy. **In these and other treatises
Luther bestialized his opponents, most frequently likening them to pigs or asses, or called them liars, murderers, and hypocrites. **They were all minions of the devil. He directed the devil to his ***, he renamed the papal decretals “decraptals’, and the Farnese pope ‘Fart-ass’ and “Her Sodomitical Hellishness Paula III and he threw around words for excrement with great abandon.” **Edwards, Companion, pg, 202.
I have been told over the years by a lot of people that this man should not have been opposed by the Church, that it should have seen the wisdom in his teachings. But then I have also been told that he was kind, loving, a mild mannered and of course, wrote great hymns, which somehow proves his ability as a Christian Theologian.
I am sure ben that I will be ‘bestialized’ for this post also, for posting the text of a Lutheran Scholar, but not of course by you. And I appreciate that.
Ben – is this the Martin Luther that you learned about in your Protestant upbringing? Do you think that his man, this particular man, should have been trusted to set out new directions in theology? Do you think that a man such as this, is the kind of man that has the kind of loving Christian heart that can properly understand the loving Christian Gospel as portrayed in Holy Scripture?
May God Continue to Bless You Ben and Happy New Year, Topper
Thank you, Jon. I wish I had the patience to respond as you do, but I am a poor, sinful, wretched being-- chiefest of sinners. And so I ask all of my CAF friends to pray for me, as I do for them.